callers of it to take advantage of this. This reduces new connection
request overhead in the face of a large number of PCBs in the system.
Thanks to David Filo <filo@yahoo.com> for suggesting this and providing
a sample implementation (which wasn't used, but showed that it could be
done).
Reviewed by: wollman
time, in seconds, that state for non-established TCP sessions stays about)
a sysctl modifyable variable.
[part 1 of two commits, I just realized I can't play with the indices as
I was typing this commit message.]
pr_usrreq mechanism which was poorly designed and error-prone. This
commit renames pr_usrreq to pr_ousrreq so that old code which depended on it
would break in an obvious manner. This commit also implements the new
interface for TCP, although the old function is left as an example
(#ifdef'ed out). This commit ALSO fixes a longstanding bug in the
TCP timer processing (introduced by davidg on 1995/04/12) which caused
timer processing on a TCB to always stop after a single timer had
expired (because it misinterpreted the return value from tcp_usrreq()
to indicate that the TCB had been deleted). Finally, some code
related to polling has been deleted from if.c because it is not
relevant t -current and doesn't look at all like my current code.
have to decide whether to send a CC or CCnew option in our SYN segment
depending on the contents of our TAO cache. This decision has to be
made once when the connection starts. The earlier code delayed this
decision until the segment was assembled in tcp_output() and
retransmitted SYN segments could have different CC options.
Reviewed by: Richard Stevens, davidg, wollman
in the FIN_WAIT_2 state in order to prevent the conn. hanging there
forever.
Reviewed by: davidg, olah
Submitted by: Arne Henrik Juul <arnej@imf.unit.no>
Obtained from: bugs@netbsd.org
Bob Braden <braden@isi.edu>.
NB: This has not had David's TCP ACK hack re-integrated. It is not clear
what the correct solution to this problem is, if any. If a better solution
doesn't pop up in response to this message, I'll put David's code back in
(or he's welcome to do so himself).
